91 replies to this topic

[Laokin]

Naeron66, on 22 November 2012 - 05:34 PM, said:

The earliest semi-automatic rifle would be the Mannlicher Model 85 or 91, which were developed around 1890.

Fixed magazines loaded via a strip predate the Model 85 by a few years and were used in a number of bolt action rifles in the late 19th century.

The M1 Garand was the first semi-automatic rifle that was a standard issue infantry weapon.

You are correct, but to my knowledge they were never service rifles. It was more of a proof of concept which lead to the design of the M1 Garand. Which was essentially the first semi automatic service rifle to my knowledge.

I'm not familiar with every country in the world, I know this is an Austrian rifle, but I don't think the Austrian's ever used it in active conflict.

Either way; very cool discussion, but alas -- this thread is supposed to be about the Ultra AC/5.

I think I've derailed it enough, ha!

[Edit; oh I see -- I meant to say first service rifle but I skipped over the word service in my initial post. Sorry for the confusion]

Edited by Laokin, 22 November 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[SteelPaladin]

Laokin, on 22 November 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

I just told you how to fix it.

Or do you want me to make you a tutorial on how to make the UAC/5 toggle Double Fire or Single Fire with no risk to accidentally double fire with your mouse drivers, cuz -- I totally will.

And naw, I still think it's fine, especially since 99.9% of gamers have gaming hardware that enables them to do this very easily.

73.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

The ability to use external software to work around an issue neither makes your initial statement that giving the option within the game would make the AC/5 "completely useless" accurate, nor does it make the idea of adding that convenience feature to the game a bad one. Sure, everyone could macro the old unjam method too, but that didn't make it any less idiotic a game mechanic.

River Walker, on 22 November 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

Sorry to inform you If a M16A1 fail to shoot in the field and can not be made to shoot in full in combat the M16A1 is removed and replace with one that dos.
Any weapon system deployed that dos not keep to stander of safety is removed and replace.
Ps you do understand their is a difference between a Cannon and a rifle

Jams happen, even w/the most modern versions of the M16. Clearing a jam is one of the first things covered in basic rifle marksmanship in the US Army's BCT. Of course, the weapon can still be made to fire in combat, just like the UAC/5 can. In fact, clearing the most common type of jam takes right about the same amount of time as the UAC/5s auto-clear.

And yes, a cannon is different from a rifle, but the basic concept is the same and a jam is still possible. ANY system that uses a shell casing, automatic loading, and a system to eject spent shell casings as part of that automatic loading is vulnerable to a jam if the ejector fails to properly clear the shell casing.

[MajorLeeHung]

As has been stated before. This is Gausswarrior: Online and the UAC buff was accidental. All is as it should be now. *nods to himself*

**on a side note I dont use gauss on anything so no Im not a gauss fanboy* just stating the facts.**

[Stingz]

Madoc Owain, on 22 November 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

Paul, here's the issue - UAC5 fires multi-shot mode when you hold down the fire button, as well as when you double-tap the fire button. Previous behavior had it firing one shot, CD then another shot if the button was held down.

This is a serious issue and is causing the weapon to jam for me 25% of the time, regardless of whether I want to double-shot or not. Because of the versatility of this weapon, it is in a separate group and fired with my right mouse button.

Unless, I'm missing something..?

UAC/ takes fineness and good timing, keep a countdown going in your head for a little over 1 second (1.1 sec recycle). It's definitely more fun to use than a regular AC/5 (1.7 recycle).

Edited by Stingz, 22 November 2012 - 05:47 PM.

[River Walker]

Laokin, on 22 November 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

You're wrong chap. The M16 was phased out yes -- but only after being in service for countless years.

The A1 was the fully automatic version of the M16, which had a toggle switch, single fire/3 shot burst/fully automatic. It didn't jam in Single Shot, rarely jammed in burst, and jammed occasionally in full auto.

There for, again -- it was the standard in which the M4 Carbine and it's variants were based on.

The M4A1 is solidly based on the M16A1, it's just shorter. This is also the go to carbine soldiers use everyday in the field today. Yes, it jams too.

Basically the M4 replaced the M16 for most operations. The M16 is still used for long range engagements, but they use newer versions/variants than the ones they used in the 60's in Vietnam.

The reason why the M16 was replaced by the M4, is because the M4 was made into a Carbine instead of an Assault Rifle.


Essentially becoming the CQB version of the M16, and since we currently fight extensively in CQB/Mid Range, the extra mobility provided by the shorter carbine proves to allow a soldier to be more mobile and allow the operator quick target acquisition when rounding corners.

This is why they still use M16's to this day for long range engagements. M16's are a staple of the American war fighter.

Buddy what dos all this crap you just Spew have to do with what happen in real life when a weapon system become unsafe AKA JAM in the field have to do with your history lesion.
No army in the world sends out its unit with a weapon system that will fail in combat, in this game it seem thy do with a cannon that jam and gets its user killed.
This is like having a airplane that its wings mite fall off,which in that case they would ground it and the plane would become razes blades.

Edited by River Walker, 22 November 2012 - 05:53 PM.

[Cattra Kell]

Because to single fire it is still effective and faster loading then the normal AC/5, that's why I still use it.

Stats:
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/#about

Look at the AC/5 and the UAC/5

Edited by Cattra Kell, 22 November 2012 - 05:54 PM.

[Laokin]

SteelPaladin, on 22 November 2012 - 05:44 PM, said:

73.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

The ability to use external software to work around an issue neither makes your initial statement that giving the option within the game would make the AC/5 "completely useless" accurate, nor does it make the idea of adding that convenience feature to the game a bad one. Sure, everyone could macro the old unjam method too, but that didn't make it any less idiotic a game mechanic.



Jams happen, even w/the most modern versions of the M16. Clearing a jam is one of the first things covered in basic rifle marksmanship in the US Army's BCT. Of course, the weapon can still be made to fire in combat, just like the UAC/5 can. In fact, clearing the most common type of jam takes right about the same amount of time as the UAC/5s auto-clear.

And yes, a cannon is different from a rifle, but the basic concept is the same and a jam is still possible. ANY system that uses a shell casing, automatic loading, and a system to eject spent shell casings as part of that automatic loading is vulnerable to a jam if the ejector fails to properly clear the shell casing.

Almost all manual game mechanics can be automated via macro -- that doesn't make the design pointless or stupid, and yes -- it would ruin the AC/5 by making the UAC/5 the go to premier build.

Having it be select fire would absolutely make it completely better independent of player skill.

Why don't we just add autopilot while we're at it, better yet, auto target, and auto heat management, etc -- I'm sure you get the point.

Look at games like Counter-Strike. None of the pistols in that game repeat fire. Every pro player has repeat fire scripts they use to get around that mechanic.

That mechanic was purposeful, as spamming click while aiming disrupts your aim, but pressing and hold a side grip button doesn't. This design warranted skillful use of pistols.

It's the same thing with the UAC/5. It's a design that is supposed to warrant skillful use at the risk of jamming in the hands of noobs.

It's clear to me, that you want the game to hand hold for you. You want all the benefits of the UAC/5 without any risk and without any skill involved.

It really is that simple, since that's what you're asking for.

[SkyCake]

Hauser, on 22 November 2012 - 04:34 PM, said:

Other way around.

For 1 extra ton you get an AC5 which gives you the option to pump out an extra round in a pinch when you need it.

are you brain dead?!

25% chance to jam everytime you fire it... im getting jams on the first shot, the damage output over time cant be better than ac5. AC2's are now so much better than UAC5's, AC/5's are clearly better as well

the whiners successfully nerfed th e UAC5 back into the mech bay... and whoa here comes the guass yet again! the most broken weapon of all!!

[Laokin]

River Walker, on 22 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Buddy what dos all this crap you just Spew have to do with what happen in real life when a weapon system become unsafe AKA JAM in the field have to do with your history lesion.
No army in the world sends out its unit with a weapon system that will fail in combat, in this game it seem thy do with a cannon that jam and gets its user killed.

Cuz you're wrong, almost every army in the world sends out their soldiers with budget gear that jams.

This is a fact of life. Real history, not the imaginary one you make up to stroke your ego.

You think the US sends all their soldiers out with Sig556-SA's?

The US Armed Forces uses M4's on a daily basis. M4's jam. They send them out into active conflict everyday with weapons that jam, because all automatics jam. Some more so than others. The M4 is one of those that is more so than others.

Get a clue.
http://online.wsj.co...0237336920.html

The M16 was in service for nearly 40 years.

The M4 nearly twenty.

And we still use the M4 today. In fact, it's the US ARMY's go to rifle.

SkyCake, on 22 November 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

are you brain dead?!

25% chance to jam everytime you fire it... im getting jams on the first shot, the damage output over time cant be better than ac5. AC2's are now so much better than UAC5's, AC/5's are clearly better as well

the whiners successfully nerfed th e UAC5 back into the mech bay... and whoa here comes the guass yet again! the most broken weapon of all!!

Gauss isn't broken.

2 can be a bit much, but if you are carrying two, you are slow as molasses and lack close range options. Certainly not out of balance. Gauss yields less dps than an AC/20, and get this, you can equip two of those too!

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Nothing but whiners up in here that need to L2P.

I almost never die to Gauss Rifles. You just have to respect the capabilities of a gausscat and capitalize on their sacrificed armor in their legs and arms. Also, pick your positioning better.

I pilot a single Gauss Rifle cat, and I mop the floor with almost every dual guass cat I engage with.

It's not even because I'm "Awesome" it's just because I'm not stupid.

P.S.

The UAC, It doesn't jam on the first shot [0%], it only jams when using double shot[25%.]

Edited by Laokin, 22 November 2012 - 06:07 PM.

[John Norad]

I don't like the 25% either, although I haven't even fielded that thing.
Watching the cooldown is a bit awkward and makes it overly complicated to use, if not chain fired. The ultra gamble isn't worth it, except in the tightest of situations.

So basically, it's still good if you don't use it for what it was designed for, or if you boat it. And every mech carrying just one of them, without a similar weapon to chain fire it is pretty much screwed.

Edited by John Norad, 22 November 2012 - 06:24 PM.

[Rhent]

Leetskeet, on 22 November 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

That's cool and I'm gonna let you finish, but you just responded to a post that you made up in your head.

Not a bit of that was in my post.

You are griping about a nerf to the UAC/5, I explained it out to you at a 7th grade level. I understand if its difficult for you to comprehend, send me an IM and I'll explain it with fewer words.

Green Mamba, on 22 November 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

Problem is Reliability of Ballistic weapons in 1,000 years will be extremely reliable considering Automatic Canons today are allready 99.99 % reliable.I know its a game but there would be better ways of rebalancing as I stated above in post #29

The problem is, no one cares about future technology. What people do care about it gameplay. And putting in a weapon that can reliable output 20 Damage in a shorter recycle time than an AC/20 and has more than 2X's the range of the AC/20 is a balance issue. The Table Top designers realized this and put in the jam.

You can do heavy burst with a UAC/5 however you have to be willing to deal with a 3 second jam. Risk vs Reward, its a key component to modern day game design.

[SkyCake]

Laokin, on 22 November 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

Cuz you're wrong, almost every army in the world sends out their soldiers with budget gear that jams.

This is a fact of life. Real history, not the imaginary one you make up to stroke your ego.

You think the US sends all their soldiers out with Sig556-SA's?

The US Armed Forces uses M4's on a daily basis. M4's jam. They send them out into active conflict everyday with weapons that jam, because all automatics jam. Some more so than others. The M4 is one of those that is more so than others.

Get a clue.
http://online.wsj.co...0237336920.html

The M16 was in service for nearly 40 years.

The M4 nearly twenty.

And we still use the M4 today. In fact, it's the US ARMY's go to rifle.




Gauss isn't broken.

2 can be a bit much, but if you are carrying two, you are slow as molasses and lack close range options. Certainly not out of balance. Gauss yields less dps than an AC/20, and get this, you can equip two of those too!

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Nothing but whiners up in here that need to L2P.

I almost never die to Gauss Rifles. You just have to respect the capabilities of a gausscat and capitalize on their sacrificed armor in their legs and arms. Also, pick your positioning better.

I pilot a single Gauss Rifle cat, and I mop the floor with almost every dual guass cat I engage with.

It's not even because I'm "Awesome" it's just because I'm not stupid.

P.S.

The UAC, It doesn't jam on the first shot [0%], it only jams when using double shot[25%.]

the gauss is awesome up close, WTF are you talking about!!!!! and for one day AC's could actually put guass's in their place and all you Fing whiners screwed that up... enjoy gauss cat online

Rhent, on 22 November 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

You are griping about a nerf to the UAC/5, I explained it out to you at a 7th grade level. I understand if its difficult for you to comprehend, send me an IM and I'll explain it with fewer words.



The problem is, no one cares about future technology. What people do care about it gameplay. And putting in a weapon that can reliable output 20 Damage in a shorter recycle time than an AC/20 and has more than 2X's the range of the AC/20 is a balance issue. The Table Top designers realized this and put in the jam.

You can do heavy burst with a UAC/5 however you have to be willing to deal with a 3 second jam. Risk vs Reward, its a key component to modern day game design.

ya, your right, the UAC5 shouldnt be better than the AC/20... but that doesnt mean you nerf the UAC5... it means you BUFF THE AC20!!!!!

AC's are supposed to be the mainstays of mech weaponry... but PGI insists on making them useless

[River Walker]

Laokin, on 22 November 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

Nothing but whiners up in here that need to L2P.

I almost never die to Gauss Rifles. You just have to respect the capabilities of a gausscat and capitalize on their sacrificed armor in their legs and arms. Also, pick your positioning better.

I pilot a single Gauss Rifle cat, and I mop the floor with almost every dual guass cat I engage with.

It's not even because I'm "Awesome" it's just because I'm not stupid.

The one that doing the WWHHH I think is you my friend. Oh by the way you talking to a guy that was in the Canadian engineer for 4 years,in my time I was slinging a FNC1.L1A1, inch-pattern Never had it jam but then again it was clean.

Edited by River Walker, 22 November 2012 - 06:19 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

This thread is now off topic... officially.

[Laokin]

Rhent, on 22 November 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

You are griping about a nerf to the UAC/5, I explained it out to you at a 7th grade level. I understand if its difficult for you to comprehend, send me an IM and I'll explain it with fewer words.



The problem is, no one cares about future technology. What people do care about it gameplay. And putting in a weapon that can reliable output 20 Damage in a shorter recycle time than an AC/20 and has more than 2X's the range of the AC/20 is a balance issue. The Table Top designers realized this and put in the jam.

You can do heavy burst with a UAC/5 however you have to be willing to deal with a 3 second jam. Risk vs Reward, its a key component to modern day game design.

Correcto, there is also something to be said for "Burst Damage" and "Sustained Damaged."

Each has their own place, in the case of using the UAC, you have high burst damage at the chance of a jam, so technically it can have lower DPS than an AC/5 but it's going to do more damage upfront every time.

Take a situation where you are about to die, and you need to shoot the AC/5 two times to kill the guy but don't have enough armor left to last long enough to actually fire both shots, the UAC wins every time, you find yourself in that position and you're going to wish you had the UAC instead.

It's also great for hit and runs, if I'm only going to get one shot of AC/5 off before I take off to make another pass, the UAC again is the best option, since each pass is equal to two passes of the AC/5, and if you jam, so what, it'll unjam before you make it to the next pass anyway.

Burst vs Sustained.

Guass Rifle = Burst
3 seconds between shots, 15 damage a shot, gives it 5 dps. Not very great, especially since you're likely to miss in between shots, which will neuter your DPS.

It's still a great weapon though since it does 15 damage, which means you don't use it for DPS, you use it primarily for Kill shots to weak sections.

Arm is red, oh okay, I'll gauss it, no more arm.

MechWarrior isn't soley about DPS, like no game is soley about dps. There is almost DPS and Burst. Burst is for frontload, DPS is for sustained.

Not a hard concept here.

[Rhent]

SkyCake, on 22 November 2012 - 06:12 PM, said:

the gauss is awesome up close, WTF are you talking about!!!!! and for one day AC's could actually put guass's in their place and all you Fing whiners screwed that up... enjoy gauss cat online



ya, your right, the UAC5 shouldnt be better than the AC/20... but that doesnt mean you nerf the UAC5... it means you BUFF THE AC20!!!!!

AC's are supposed to be the mainstays of mech weaponry... but PGI insists on making them useless

Lay of the Pipe. The UAC/5 is a very good weapon. Try fighting close up a Cataphract 4X massing 4 of them. Or the smarter guy running AC/5's and UAC/5's to handle the heat.

I'm at the point where I switched back to TAG and LRM's to play something more risky dealing with minimum range rather than running my Gauss Cat/Phract, AC/20 Cat/Phract or UAC/5 Phract. Having a gauranteed win in 1 v 1 is lame. Having to run like mad and read the battlefield to not get owned by lights running LRM's is a lot better than the FACEROLL that is using AC's versus other players.

Of course you have to know how to use AC's and know how to fight with them. If you don't know how to fight with AC's then you are going to come to the forums and post about how weak the strongest weapons in the game are.

[John Norad]

Laokin, on 22 November 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

Correcto, there is also something to be said for "Burst Damage" and "Sustained Damaged."

Each has their own place, in the case of using the UAC, you have high burst damage at the chance of a jam, so technically it can have lower DPS than an AC/5 but it's going to do more damage upfront every time.

Well, the UAC can jam before the first double shot. So 'more damage upfront every time' is a bit optimistic.

[Laokin]

River Walker, on 22 November 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

The one that doing the WWHHH I think is you my friend. Oh by the way you talking to a guy that was in the Canadian engineer for 4 years,in my time I was slinging a FNC1.L1A1, inch-pattern Never had it jam but then again it was clean.

To be honest, you can't even type, so I don't expect your literacy levels to be up to speed to actually comprehend what I type, let alone comprehend reality.

"I was in the Canadian Engineer and I slung an FNC1.L1A1"

Um, so? That doesn't change reality that 99.9% of the soldiers in this world aren't running around with FN weapons.

Your Experience =/= The Worlds Reality.

[That means, does not equal.]

FN weapons are also notorious for how little they jam, they are some of the VERY BEST weapons in the entire world and certainly NOT reflective of the average soldier, or the average military forces of the world.

You said "No country uses weapons that Jam" -- well that's just not true, even FN weapons jam, just not as much as other weapons, and even at that, are used by about 1% of the worlds soldiers. FN weapons are also really expensive, which is why they aren't common.

Where as weapons like the M4 JAM ALL THE TIME and are the most commonly used weapon by the world strongest military.


Also, I'm not whining -- whining = complaining. I've addressed how the UAC/5 works, and it works fine. I also addressed the outcry of "Why does my Mech have weapons that Jam" by explaining how and why jams work, and exactly how common they are in weapons.

All you want to do is argue with me by saying "No soldiers use weapons that jam."

Which is just absolutely ignorant to say the least, and also sounds a lot like whining to me.

"Whaa, my gun jams, it shouldn't cuz nobody uses guns that jam in real conflict, so therefor my mech shouldn't jam either, Whaa"

Does it sound a lot like whining to everyone else? Yeah, I thought so.

Edited by Laokin, 22 November 2012 - 06:33 PM.

[Khavi Vetali]

John Norad, on 22 November 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

Well, the UAC can jam before the first double shot. So 'more damage upfront every time' is a bit optimistic.

No it cannot. If for some reason it does for you, bug report it, because it is not supposed to do so. The chance to jam only occurs if you doubleshot.

[TigrisMorte]

First, gauss is not broken. In fact it is about the only weapon working as designed.
Second, just like LRMs, what was broken was what they changed not the weapon as designed.
I understand why they upped the jam. But the design is a weapon which only double fires on active choice to do so and then has a very, very small chance of jam rendered uselessness. As a result the Ultra ACs were only risked in double shot when the extra shot really mattered. The Devs have chosen to not implement ultra ACs but instead name their alternate version Ultra.
Their version fits in their implementation. I tested it in a dozen matches today and it is actually very effective if you are not unable to control your self.
I disagree with it since it throws away years of research and math to "improve on Shakespeare".
Jordan Weisman is a god (little g), we are not worthy.